Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-26 15:46 | Report Abuse

The heroes in the Kong Wu will usually spend their energy hitting the strong with the changkul to support the weak. 👍💪 (鋤強扶弱, not sure whether you can read Chinese)

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-26 16:03 | Report Abuse

No problem...I googled that and got it translated...need the original Mandarin to understand it. You have done that....I am just geh poh geh poh. 😂😂

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-26 20:17 | Report Abuse

I need wrap up the "Brutus" Conspiracy theory and moving on to other things.

I went back to 2012 AGM Meeting Minutes

https://disclosure.bursamalaysia.com/FileAccess/apbursaweb/download/?name=EA_GM_Attachments&id=6053

Numbers don't lies. It is super easy understand why such a small issue had been blown out of proportions - Making a big mountain out of a small molehill.

There were 8 nominees - 5 seeking re-elections and 3 new nominees. Here were the results:

1 Datuk Ng Peng Hong @ Ng Peng Hay(Re-election)
For/% 80,795,355 / 95.88%
Against/% 3,473,000 / 4.12%
Total 84,268,355

2 Dato’ Dr. Norraesah Binti Mohamad(Re-election)
For/% 82,907,654 / 98.36%
Against/% 1,380,401 / 1.64%
Total 84,288,055

3 Tunku Abdul Aziz Bin Tunku Ibrahim(Re-election)
For/% 79,027,655 / 96.88%
Against/% 2,546,200 / 3.12%
Total 81,573,855

4 YM Tunku Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Ahmad Bin Tunku Yahaya(Re-election)
For/% 73,674,455 / 87.85%
Against/% 10,188,400 / 12.15%
Total 83,862,855

5 Tan Ang Meng(Relection)
For/% 74,203,705 / 87.48%
Against/% 10,615,150 / 12.52%
Total 84,818,855

6 Andrew Pegge(Laxey Partner) ** NEW**
For/% 11,347,951 / 13.44%
Against/% 73,110,804 / 86.56%
Total 84,458,755

7 Lo Kok Kee(iCAP Member nomination) **NEW**
For/% 10,637,601 / 12.63%
Against/% 73,606,654 / 87.37%
Total 84,244,255

8 Low Nyap Heng(COL) ** NEW **
For/% 11,138,951 / 13.2%
Against/% 73,122,204 / 86.8%
Total 84,261,155

At that point of time, Laxey has about 9.6 million shares and COL has 9.3 million shares.

If it is true that COL+ Laxey joint hands, you will see at least 18.9 million shares(9.6+9.3 million-kingdee math) for COL and Laxey each. On the contrary, COL had only 11.1 million and Laxey 11.3 million. That means they gi gi ku gi gi(teow chew lang saying) – each take care of themselves. It is totally untrue when I read another report in the news paper that Laxey asked people to vote for all 3 of them. Numbers said otherwise, you know who is telling the truth!

2. COL, Laxey and Lo were extremely professional, for those qualified directors, they voted for them. That is why you can see 97- 98%. If all 3 of them voted against, you will have to subtract 30+millions resulted they received only about 70%.

3. There were 2 directors that seeking reelection received 12% against votes, this must be either 1 of the 3 parties voted against them. Rumors had it, COL objected one of the directors age was above 70 years old that need special resolutions. Despite that the director received > 75% approval. Hence re-elected. This riled the fund manager as reported by the Star.

Looking purely on the "facts", I don't think it fit the theory of sacking all the BODs that seeking re-election and installed new directors, took over the company and liquidate them. It is total UNTRUE! I am not smart but definite not a PAK CHEE kia.

I rest my case and do not think I need to waste time to dwell in this topic. It is incurable if the Brutus conspiracy magic spells created by the fund manager still bonding you.

By looking into today's share price, people believe is more convinced that liquidation is out of the questions and taking some money off the table. Whoever want to stay, it is only betting on the fund manager will perform or perhaps still hanging on a small hope of improved governance. This could be his last chance. Don't screw it up!

Posted by speakup > 2023-10-26 21:41 | Report Abuse

read the icap annual report. icap lost a massive 17MIL from Bstead! horror!

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-26 22:10 | Report Abuse

Haha, following FastMoney post mortem evidence analysis, the alleged conspirator should at least get a DNAA, discharge not amounting to acquittal then. Disturbing the peace maybe, which is only a misdemeanor, but definitely not trying a coup, which would be treason. Brutus and company didn't try to murder Caesar then and history needs to be rewritten.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 08:26 | Report Abuse

"‘Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone
are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form
the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to
them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the
principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!’"

"‘Bitzer,’ said Thomas Gradgrind. ‘Your definition of a horse.’

‘Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth,
and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs,
too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in
mouth.’ Thus (and much more) Bitzer.

‘Now girl number twenty,’ said Mr. Gradgrind. ‘You know what a horse is.’"

Hard Times by Charles Dickens

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 12:05 | Report Abuse

@FastMoney Now you are blaming the exit of shareholders on my saying that liquidation is out of the question. Let me properly clarify it this way. Judging by past voting trends, liquidation is unlikely, i.e. improbable, but until CDAM has gained control of at least 25% of the total shares outstanding, it is not impossible, i.e. there is still a mathematical chance of it happening, e.g. if 5 shareholders acting in concert make a general offer so attractive that outside shareholders simply cannot refuse and throw in their shares, then the 75% super majority can be achieved. The question is, at what cost? I think I have explained enough for most shareholders to make their own informed judgment. I am not licensed to give financial advise and none is given here.

Posted by zhangwin > 2023-10-27 12:43 | Report Abuse

@dumbMoney,

Latest Q1 icap report:
Cumulative 3Y Return (21 Oct2020 to 20 Oct 2023); icap 55.8% share price and 32.7% NAV vs. MSCI Malaysia -11.07%.
3Y Annualised Return icap share price 15.9% and 9.88% NAV vs.-3.83 MSCI Malaysia.

Any comments?

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 13:34 | Report Abuse

@zhangwin If performance is so good, why price is still at discount? Should be at premium already like in the early years. What went wrong now?

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 13:36 | Report Abuse

@dumbMoney - CDAM is welcome to buy, why 25% only le? I always wanted him to buy till 38% . Like i3lurker always said iCAP fengshui is very bad, he is welcomed to take it back at anytime....but make sure those discounts disappear first.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 14:08 | Report Abuse

@FastMoney How many times must I tell you that the discount is not management's problem, it is the shareholders' who ask them crazy enough to sell at a discount in the first place. As far as the manager is concerned, his KPI is NAV and his fees are based on that, not market cap. Different pages on the same book, and since your Chinese is so geng one, same bed, but different dreams.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 14:12 | Report Abuse

@Zhangwin, you must be new to this channel....some answers can be found in our FAQs especially after dumbMoney and I sparred almost 300 posts. Short answer: CDAM bought a lot of shares by eliminating his competition COL!

Now a bit long answer.

If you are new to iCapital.biz, you must work hard ya. Because the fund manager will always project his performance in the most positive way. Not wrong but as an investor, must do homework ya.

Now a little bit long answer.

In 2018, iCAP NAV was almost $3.70, then it went down a lot lau sai until $2.8. Then its NAV hit more than $ 4 in mid 2011, then it lau sai, dropped as low as 3.2 and there you are now around 3.50. if you take 2.8 the low lau sai point or some where around there, it's look very good like you said about 32.7% but my calculation is less than that.

So hindsight ya...if the fund manager manage to take profit for the last 2-3 cycles, then our poor almost coming to70s don't have to do so many roadshows.


Visit our channel frequently ya.

Cheers!!🍻

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 14:14 | Report Abuse

*poor fund manager. Normally I always pity old people

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 14:17 | Report Abuse

@dumbMoney - today eat wrong medicine ya....😂😂 or you went shopping buying a black hat? 😂😂

Why ask me so many tough questions......wait ha, I call the fund manager and get an answer for you.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 14:18 | Report Abuse

Once management has 25% shareholdings, already set for life. The balance 75% is then working for him, not him working for the 75%. Imagine if the fund can produce a 10% NAV increase p.a. before fees. His 1.5% fee is equivalent to a 15% free carried interest in the profits. You can go back and check how many trades he does on average per year, divide that by the annual fees, that is how much he charges per stock trade.

Posted by Sslee > 2023-10-27 14:28 | Report Abuse

VETERAN business journalist and blogger Datuk A. Kadir Jasin has hit out at the slew of overly optimistic projection of the Malaysian stock market and the ringgit exchange rate as 2023 is drawing to a close.

Referring to the latest market view by Capital Dynamics Sdn Bhd managing director Tan Teng Boo that the Malaysian stock market will return to strength soon, Kadir described such view as merely “talking up the market” or to inject enthusiasm in the market.

“I wonder if market view of this veteran analyst can become a reality or if he is a fortune teller with magical binoculars. Likewise, MIDF Research had on Oct 3 predicted that our ringgit would strengthen to close at RM4.30 by end-2023,” penned the national journalism laureate on his Facebook page.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 16:08 | Report Abuse

The fund manager didn't answer my call, thinking I want to sell him personal loan 😂😂

Someone told me, publicly they cannot tell the whole world discounts is not their problem. But privately they have engineered equivalent to iCAP SBB by using CDAM to buy iCAP shares. But they also said, they cannot give COL the credits because right after the injunction lifted, COL started to buy from 7 August - 15 September, the share price had a massive breakout from 2.3 till 2.9++. During these periods, COL accounted for almost 36% of the buying activities. In the same period, CDMA bought very little shares but was getting jealous. So, iCAP stopped COL from buying with SICDA and the roadshows. And then, and then ah...... CDAM just keep buying on dips.

Sekian terima kasih, laporan terkini daripade berite "3(Sam) Ku 6(Loke) Poh"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>
@FastMoney How many times must I tell you that the discount is not management's problem, it is the shareholders' who ask them crazy enough to sell at a discount in the first place. As far as the manager is concerned, his KPI is NAV and his fees are based on that, not market cap. Different pages on the same book, and since your Chinese is so geng one, same bed, but different dreams
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 16:18 | Report Abuse

But it is also perfectly possible to have the same dreams on different beds without any connections or relations. Just need to tune to the same wavelengths.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 16:31 | Report Abuse

Lo fu, Lo chai loh .....no problemo.....choi -- cheong hei(long winded)😜

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 21:53 | Report Abuse

Here are the purchases by CDAM since iCAP inception extracted from Top 30 largest shareholders

'000***** # of shares****Changes***Remarks
2006***********Not in Top 30
2007***********Not in Top 30
2008****** 539**** + 539 ***2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, discounts to NAV 6-13%
2009****** 689**** +150****2007-2008 Global Financial Crisis, discounts to NAV 7-12%
2010****** 689*** + 0
2011****** 689*** +0
2012****** 689*** +0
2013****** 689*** +0
2014****** 689*** +0
2015****** 689*** +0
2016****** 689*** +0
2017****** 739*** +50
2018************Drop off from Top 30
2019************Drop off from Top 30
2020************Drop off from Top 30
2021************Drop off from Top 30
2022****** 1,860***** +1,121******Discount to NAV 30-40%
2023****** 3,077***** +1,217******Discount to NAV 30-40%, until recently(Sept-Oct) 25% range. Most purchased done earlier than August 2023

You can see clearly his buying behavior fitted exactly what I described as iCAP PUT. He stepped in during the Great Financial Crisis even though the discounts were not that fantastics. He even boasted it's very resilient against KLCI. Of course he didn't shout, hey guys and gals, I am buying. Only in retrospective, when I put on a microscope on him, found out he did it out of his natural instincts to buy during panics.

In other years that he didn't buy anything, the discounts to NAV ranges in between 20 - 25%. (More rational level)

He stepped in again when discounts were widening of which I called IRRATIONAL levels. I am going keep eye on him whether he will continue to buy when it reaches 20-25% range or till the discounts reaches 0-10%. If he did, my only conclusion is he wants to gain more controls via CDAM or his other investment vehicles.

This is why I'm pissed off when he consistently refusing SBB to buy on behalf of iCAP's shareholders, especially now he decided to return a portion of cash back to shareholders.

I am perfectly happy if he buys only 4 out of 18 years. Denying iCAP PUT is like denying gravity doesn't exist-- something I could not swallow. I don't think other shareholders can if they see this.

This data clearly defined what is a horse. PANICS, RATIONAL and IRRATIONAL discounts.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 22:18 | Report Abuse

@FastMoney, there is this saying Do as I say, not do as I do. During my stockbroking days, corporate owners would tell all that would listen to follow him to buy his counter, or do a company SBB, but he is actually selling through his nominee accounts on the other side. I always tell my clients then, if the share is so good, why should the owner tell every one to buy unless he has already done all his buying and now wants the price to go up so that he can sell? Why let others compete with him if he is still buying? But people still want to believe in Santa Claus.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 22:24 | Report Abuse

Haiz... Nia Mah😤

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 23:39 | Report Abuse

A disclaimer is in order here. What I related above is from my personal experience from the past century. Any resemblance or similarities to present day events are purely coincidental and unintentional.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-27 23:47 | Report Abuse

Those readers here old enough to be active in the stock market then would have heard of the stock players syndicate known as the A Team, named after the popular TV series then starring George Peppard and Mr. T. I was one of their many brokers.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-27 23:51 | Report Abuse

Ya..you are out from Kong Wu long time ago, I think. The wild wild west apa pun boleh...like UEM-Renong, Bank Bumiputra scandals etc...that's the topic for another day.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-28 00:35 | Report Abuse

Yes, I could have said, been there, done that! Was collateral damage from the Pan Electric scandal that led to the suspension of the Malaysian and Singapore markets for a few days and the failures of a number of stockbrokers.

Posted by Integrity. Intelligent. Industrious. 3iii (iiinvestsmart)$€£¥ > 2023-10-28 08:22 | Report Abuse

Be wise to never trust wholesomely target price or market prediction by analysts

By FocusM
24 hours ago
in Featured, Markets, Top

VETERAN business journalist and blogger Datuk A. Kadir Jasin has hit out at the slew of overly optimistic projection of the Malaysian stock market and the ringgit exchange rate as 2023 is drawing to a close.


Referring to the latest market view by Capital Dynamics Sdn Bhd managing director Tan Teng Boo that the Malaysian stock market will return to strength soon, Kadir described such view as merely “talking up the market” or to inject enthusiasm in the market.

“I wonder if market view of this veteran analyst can become a reality or if he is a fortune teller with magical binoculars. Likewise, MIDF Research had on Oct 3 predicted that our ringgit would strengthen to close at RM4.30 by end-2023,” penned the national journalism laureate on his Facebook page.

Posted by Integrity. Intelligent. Industrious. 3iii (iiinvestsmart)$€£¥ > 2023-10-28 08:24 | Report Abuse

"It is more honest to say I don't know and that my past predictions were sometimes very wrong."

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-28 09:25 | Report Abuse

@ 3i - My apology to you accusing you iCAP machai. You suddenly drown me with messages that day esspecially a lot of them with very distinct black twisted Ceasar 2012 coup. We are good, will be friend. Plese also fire me if sometimes I talk nonsense. Cheers. Morning beers 🍻

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-28 09:46 | Report Abuse

For those those think corporate governance doesn't matter or buy and hold forever no need to think, here is a small recap on Pan-Electric Industries scandal. Tan Koon Swoon was the ex-president of MCA.

Pan-Electric Industries was a Singapore-based company that specialised in marine salvage work, and had 71 subsidiary companies, including hotel and property interests, with a market capitalization of S$230 million.[1][2] The company collapsed in December of 1985[3] due to massive unsettled forward contracts, forcing the Stock Exchange of Singapore (SES) and Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (KLSE) to shut down for three days.[4][5] At its demise, the company had a total debt of S$480 million, and all its shares held by 5,500 shareholders were found to be worthless overnight. As of 2000, it remains the largest corporate collapse in Singapore's history, and the only instance where the SES had to be unexpectedly closed.[1]

In the aftermath of the collapse, key people in the company such as Peter Tham, Tan Kok Liang, and Tan Koon Swan were prosecuted and given varying jail sentences. The collapse of the company shook public confidence in the SES, causing prices of stocks to plunge and resulted in the bankruptcy of some stockbroking firms.[6] New securities laws were introduced in March 1986 to ensure that stockbroking firms could protect themselves against credit risks.[1][7]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Electric_Industries

If you want to invest in any conglomerate with many subsidiaries, they can hide a lot of things.

This can be a topic we can talk about after AGM....I have a few more of my thoughts related to iCAP I want to share in the new few days.

I want to emphasize, iCAP IS NOT in this category. Second Repeat: ICAP IS NOT in this category. Third Repeat: iCAP IS NOT in this category.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-28 10:00 | Report Abuse

iCAP is not a big issue at the moment except the fund manager is a bit actions....talk big sometimes, "si ai bein"(want face), insulting people especially people people disagree with him, seeking a BOD or from Michigan, from Beijing is OK. I merely want to give him a small slap on his wrist out of "Kong Wu Ye Hei". He got some inconsistencies on what he said and did. You have read those. He still got bottomline in his integrity. But this is a public company, a check and balance system needs to be there. I don't want my grandchildren to be a victim down the line if I choose to buy and hold forever. Who knows his successor becoming a Darth Vader and no more Yoda Master around? 😝....

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-28 10:04 | Report Abuse

@3iii This is why most funds will carry the standard disclaimer that past performance is no guarantee for future success, just in case get accused of over promised and under delivered. They then list out all the possible risks that can happen to the investment, practically telling the investors that they are buying at their own risks. Instead of relying on public prosecutors to take offenders to court, US contingency fee based class action lawyers have taken on the role of prosecutors taking companies to civil courts for a share of the damages awarded. This works as quite an effective deterrent to corporate wrong doings. Here, without such class actions, how many individual shareholder can afford to take companies to court, other than filing complaints to the regulators. Investors cannot even voice their complaints in public in case they get sued for defamation.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-28 10:07 | Report Abuse

Those invested with hedge funds or PE and etc are high nett worth people. That is why a minimum nett worth not counting their house will be at least $ 3 million ringgit, losing $1 million Riggit won't kill them. But for those only have 500-1 million in their 50s, those with 100-200 k shares with iCAP, a mishaps, "Tzar doh mo ler"(semua hanggus).

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 09:31 | Report Abuse

My final thoughts on iCAP innovative dividend – it’s time to call his bluff.

The fund manager has been very clever, every now and then, he will come out with programs to appease the shareholders. Unfortunately, each time a proposal was rejected, thing would end up with status quo.

The shareholders won many small battles but losing a war. Meaning, shareholders apa pun tak dapat while they continue to charge at FULL NAV! He just buys time goyang kaki and collect the toll fees! How shrewd!

We must not fall into his trap again and again. For pragmatic reasons, we should accept this proposal for a very good reason. It will help to reduce NAV ex-dividend hence it will reduce the management fees.

Assuming all takes cash, put the money in our own pockets.

Using last week 25/10/2023 NAV/share 3.52 for an example

NAV(before dividend) = RM 492 million ---> Management fees(1.5%) = RM 7.4 million

NAV(assume 15 million dividend paid) = RM 477 million(subtract 15 million from 492 milion) ---> Management fees(1.5%) = RM 7.15 million

Savings of management fees to shareholders = 245 k.

Do not under-estimate this small number, if we project it to 10 years out, cumulatively there will be a 2.45 million lesser management fees charge to the shareholders.

Even though I will accept it for the pragmatic reasons but for the record: I protest/disagree with the logics listed below here:

1. The innovative dividend payout formula is very negative(reactive) and having an implied 24% discount perpetually to get 4% dividend.

2. I am on the same page with dumbMoney:

(a) DRIP issued at a 10% discount is discriminatory to those shareholders who are willing to accept cash dividend.

(b) DRIP holders can always sell the “free 10% discount” shares that will create additional supply to the market that may leads to further discounts to NAV.

(c) The statement by iCAP saying this program will reduce price discounts. Strongly disagree. Will let someone to sort it out with the Dividend Irrelevance Theory at the Q&A session with the Koala Bear Professor. (P/S He solved the discount problems by using his own clients’ money, CDAM, to buy more shares)

This innovative dividend is only at the proposal level and is not a resolution to be voted. Don’t fall into his famous crying wolf( lang lai leh!), they are coming to murder the program again because they hate me. For the record, fund manager, Sarang Hae Yo! Chin chiah Sarang Hae Yo! 💞

We don’t need to be so “kan cheong”. When the times come, accept it - Vote FOR- put the money in our pockets for the pragmatic reasons despite of his flaw’s logics and unsound frameworks.

Have I given up the iCAP PUT? NO, NEVEEEER! But I can wait. Why?

Not urgent now because there is no IRRATIONAL discounts or PANICS (so ban ban lai). Will push hard after the dividend program is implemented. The logic is simple, your fund manager had done it via CDAM! Kamsiah lu, fund manager.

Each year we say NO, the fund manager will keep more money in his pockets. It’s time to call his bluff! Take the money OFF the table.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 09:51 | Report Abuse

😝🙈

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 11:27 | Report Abuse

@FastMoney Your arguments are still a bit rough. You should say if given the choice of 1% dividend and no price discount or 4% dividend but 20% price discount, you would choose the former and let the fund manager keep the 3% reduction in management fee cut. And I am sure most shareholders would also agree with you then. But the problem is, will you get these choices in the first place? Some one will be needed to take out COL's huge block of shares if the discount starts narrowing near to zero. The deep discount is the shark bait that got COL onto the share register in the first place. You expect them to still want to stay in such a hostile environment once they can cut loose and go somewhere else more foreign shareholder friendly? So this is the problem, once you invited someone in as a house guest with such an attractive discount, the only way to get rid of him is to narrow the discount. Since your Chinese is so geng, the saying is the one to untie the bell is the one who tied it in the first place.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 13:03 | Report Abuse

Yeah, bo choice😭😭 on his second variable on the formula...as you pointed out.

For a simple folk like me, 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5% or 6%, dun care ady... Take any penny off the table. I don't take, he takes, so better I take. 😂😂

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 13:17 | Report Abuse

This is what my Chinaman business friend told me about how to do business that my fancy universities didn't teach - Buy at $10, sell at $7, repay the creditors $3, still make $4. So iCap makes $10, pay shareholders $4, management still earns fees on $6, same principles. And the natives hopefully are no longer restive.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 13:33 | Report Abuse

Here is another free Finance 101 tutorial. One of the many stock valuation formulae is share price = PV of all future dividend payments + PV of the terminal value. Here, PV is present value at the discount rate for the investor. Terminal value is the final exit value of the investment, which to the horror of some readers here, equals the realisable value if the business is liquidated, or the shares sold finally after holding it through the ages. A discount will be priced in if the investors' internal discount rate is higher than the expected growth rate of the terminal value. So the simplest way to remove the discount is to raise the 'expected' growth rate of the NAV, i.e. talk it up through road show and investors day. So management cannot price in a discount while talking about dividend payout as it is an admission that their expected growth rate is not going to beat the investors' discount rate.

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 13:45 | Report Abuse

Share price discount = PV ((investor discount rate - expected NAV growth rate) x NAV). The discount then depends on the difference between discount rate and expected growth rate, and the number of years to be discounted. The longer the holding period and the greater the returns gap, the greater will be the discount. As management has pointed out all this while, the fault lies with investors having too high an unreasonable discount rate or returns expectations.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 13:58 | Report Abuse

@dumbMoney, since it's a free tutorial, I will try to thick face lo.

Chinaman business skill geng....Sell Price(7)-cost(10-3) = 0 but going IPO, get $ 4? His competitors die, his creditors die, IPO money masuk pocket.

😂😂

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 13:59 | Report Abuse

Or actually real cost is 3 since that's all you paid regardless of invoice price. Sell price 7 - 3 = $ 4

Geng

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:23 | Report Abuse

Teminal value = NAV/(d-g) where d is investor discount rate, g is iCAP management expected growth rate.

So it will become negative as soon as g > d, negative value is not adding value but subtracting value from sum of the PV of dividend d1/(1+d)+d2/(1+d)^2+......dn/(1+d)^n + NAV/(d-g)

It's more like a math logic, hopefully I got it right....1/2 past 6 student

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 14:33 | Report Abuse

@FastMoney, I did ask you whether you are a finance student before and you said you are not. Then you are a very fast learner, can come up with NAV(d-g), the essence of the discount factor. I was just trying to KISS. So if g>d, discount becomes a premium, like just post IPO years. Actually, the fancy degreed corporate cowboys also understood the Chinaman MO. Inject business or do an IPO at a PER of 10, guarantees 3 years of profit, walks away with 7 years buta money from suckered investors. Same principle.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:38 | Report Abuse

@dumbMoney - paiseh....nowadays easy to impress people by just google up in the internet or ask Chat GPT. But can also buy a PHD Doctorate like Dr Lim from Top Glove😂😂

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:38 | Report Abuse

But I believe your are real Dr.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:44 | Report Abuse

So long story short, I believe simplest answer still, If I don't take, he takes, so better I take.

So I want to call his bluff, go ahead and get it done, see whether he can get it done in 3 months...if still ee...ehhh...eehh. then you know he is full of shits

Posted by dumbMoney > 2023-10-29 14:46 | Report Abuse

Same thing with taking the dividend cash. The value add to you is the elimination of the price discount on the cash, the management fee, and the corporate tax payable on the interest earned. No magic sauce added, just some fancy descriptive labelling. What you give up is the potential g>d factor. But then, you cannot have the best of everything in your favor.

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:51 | Report Abuse

That is why once the theorem is set and validated, it is very difficult to say gravity does exist!

Posted by FastMoney666 > 2023-10-29 14:52 | Report Abuse

*doesn't(correction)